2 1/2 Years and $104,900 In Price Cuts Later: 1208 W. Webster in Lincoln Park
We first chattered about this 2-bedroom at 1208 W. Webster in Lincoln Park all the way back in September of 2008 and again in January 2009 after a price cut.
See our January 2009 chatter here.
It was originally listed for nearly $40,000 more than the 2006 purchase price of $460,000 before being cut just $20,000.
Given that we were in the middle of the financial crisis in January 2009, it’s not surprising that the commenters thought the property was overpriced.
Back in 2009, Sonies thought the 2002 price of $355,000 wasn’t “bad” and that he would “consider it” at that price.
The property was withdrawn from the market in February 2009 but returned 2 years later in February 2011.
Since its January 2009 listing, it has now been reduced $104,900 to $375,000.
The unit has hardwood floors and a fireplace in the living room.
The kitchen has maple cabinets, stainless steel appliances and granite counter tops.
The listing says the bathrooms are marble.
It has central air and in-unit washer/dryer but there is no deeded parking. There is only rental parking available nearby.
Will Sonies be right- 2 1/2 years later- that someone will “consider it” at the 2002 price of $355,000?
Khadija Yahia-Bey at Jameson Sotheby’s now has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #4: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1325 square feet
- Sold in February 2002 for $355,000
- Sold in August 2006 for $460,000
- Was listed in September 2008 for $499,900
- Reduced
- Was listed in January 2009 for $479,900
- Withdrawn in February 2009
- Re-listed in February 2011 for $430,000
- Reduced numerous times
- Currently listed for $375,000
- Assessments aren’t listed but in 2009 they were $143 a month
- Taxes are now $6247 (were $4,922 in 2009)
- Central air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- No parking- leased nearby
- Bedroom #1: 17×12
- Bedroom #2: 10×12
I’d be so fat if I lived about Sweet Mandy B’s….
I would not want to live over a store front.
As if $6247 in taxes (which “ought” to go down when it sells for so much less) and rental parking weren’t deterrent enough, the door to the outside from the master bedroom is so Motel 6.
“$6247 in taxes (which “ought” to go down when it sells for so much less)”
If it sells at $375, and is assessed at that amount, the decrease would be under $800 at last year’s tax level.
But not just ANY store front, Sweet Mandy B’s!!! yummmmmm
At least go back and get a good summer photo of the outdoor area…
Not clear from the photos if the only access to that deck is from the master bedroom. If so, yikes!
The taxes will not drop on sale.
The space is decent, the price is decent, but there this is about as far as you can get from an el stop within LP… so a car is pretty much necessary here. I think it will trade for $350K without parking.
Note condition of front bays…. Hmmm.
Uninspiring and expensive
CC’ers – what do you all think of the pricing of this unit?
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1969-W-Winona-St-60640/unit-3/home/13403342
I wouldn’t even go see it without knowing what the assessments are – not including them definitely raises my suspicions.
“CC’ers – what do you all think of the pricing of this unit?”
Funny!
@WPer
Cosmetically, nice-looking work on kitchen/bath/floors/paint. Assessments seem very low to include heat (no reserves?), if that’s a concern to you. It’s *right* across from Amundsen, if hordes of teenagers bother you.
Don’t think it’s way out of whack with rental parity, although as with all small condos like this, you gotta think about the transaction costs if you’re not planning on staying a while.
TY Roma
anon – I don’t post here enough to get the joke but glad I could give you a laugh
Where is bizarro homedelete to tell us what a great deal this is?
“I don’t post here enough to get the joke but glad I could give you a laugh”
I think it’s funny that the place sold in 2003 for $170, 4 months ago as a (probable) short sale for $90 and now they want $199 for it. Especially when I note that 1961 Winona #3 is u/c with last list of $215 (hard to tell, but seems meaningfully larger–1999 last sale for $90). Also enjoy the “in” white cabinets, the “out” ss appliances, w/d, but no parking (across the st parking must be HS lot), non-functional fireplace making TV location a challenge, that 1961–the best comp–has a crib in the second BR.
It just rolls in a lot of cc themes.
Again, in the sub-$400k LP market (leaving aside 1/1.5’s that are highrise and/or high end rehabs), why would anybody consider a place like this, given the 3/2.5’s at Grant and Clark, the 3/2 on Commonwealth, the 2/2 at Belden and Clark, etc.?
Pretty sure it would rent for 1100 no problem, perhaps as much as $1250.
above refers to winona
So, JP$, the four block walk to the either the Fullerton or the Armitage stops “necessitates” a car? Are you disabled?
“Pretty sure it would rent for 1100 no problem, perhaps as much as $1250.”
At $1250, with those taxes and assessments, the ask price takes it under a 5 cap. $159k would be a 6, which is okay if your going to live there a while.
Heitman’s calc would call it about $215.
i always forget stevo’s equation, but it was obviously crazy NARtalk.
anyway, wp’er is almost certainly not interested in it as a rental investment and doesn’t need a 6% cap rate. probably just needs to not lose his/her shirt. @ 179 (10% off ask) they’re probably good on that front.
gotta roll, but Sabrina, how about a post on 2823 pine grove tomorrow??
When we talk how places in Lincoln Park may be heading back to 2002 prices, here’s a recently listed home in Lincoln Park where the buyer’s asking price is below its 2000 sale price. http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2131-N-Lakewood-Ave-60614/home/13353036
Generic 2/2 with no parking. Small. Deck off the master? Parking impossible around there.
Bad buy above $300.
“always forget stevo’s equation”
turned around, to calc value from rent:
12*(rent-ass)-tax/.055/.8 = value
His use was for “in an emergency, can I rent it and cover the nut”. I only hate backing out the DP. Ignoring that, gets you in the low $170s.
“wp’er is almost certainly not interested in it as a rental investment and doesn’t need a 6% cap rate.”
I like to think 6 as a reasonable baseline for safety in a o/o circumstance, unless you have a long horizon. I feel if you’re buying condos at 6, and only accounting for current assessments and past year taxes in calc’ing that 6, you’re skating fairly thin and/or relying on appreciation and/or rental inflation outstripping T+A increases and/or have FIT reasons for doing so.
“CC’ers – what do you all think of the pricing of this unit?”
What’s with the thread hijacking today?
$30-50k over-priced.
What’s with the taxes? I only pay about $1,000 more in taxes and my house is on the North Shore (on a 60X160 lot and with North Shore public schools). I’m trying to figure out what those taxes get me in Chicago at this place. No outdoor space? CPS? Daley’s famous parking meters? The Skyway?
“When we talk how places in Lincoln Park may be heading back to 2002 prices, here’s a recently listed home in Lincoln Park where the buyer’s asking price is below its 2000 sale price.”
*Sigh*
Yet another “the sky is falling in LP” comment based upon a property that I could only drive to (i.e., rather than walk to), but would hate doing so due to its location and the traffic and miserable sights involved.
There are other LP properties that are priced at under 2002 prices that aren’t as far west as that property on Lakewood. It all depends on the condition of the property etc.
280k
CC’ers – what do you all think of the pricing of this unit?
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1969-W-Winona-St-60640/unit-3/home/13403342
Not many sold comps in the immediate area, only one I see is 1907 Winona for 191k
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/5076-N-Wolcott-Ave-60640/unit-1-JUL/home/12593931
So my guess is 1969 goes for something roughly similar.
( stuck in moderation)
CC’ers – what do you all think of the pricing of this unit?
Not many sold comps in the immediate area, only one I see is 1907 Winona for 191k
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/5076-N-Wolcott-Ave-60640/unit-1-JUL/home/12593931
So my guess is 1969 goes for something roughly similar.
@ dahliachi, I love the unit you poster (for the price). I don’t know about the hood, but the interior is much nicer than the comp at least to me.
The realtor should update the photo of the back deck with snow on it, considering it’s almost the end of summer. That just shows how long it’s been on the market.
“What’s with the taxes?”
They’re actually a bit low case on the last sale price. Prolly should be 5% higher.
And, what you get is Stroger’s and Daley’s (and the 50 aldercritters’) friends and family employment plan.
Taxes may be ridiculous and the location above a store not ideal for a place listing at nearly $400K. However, I do appreciate that it has a nice fireplace, with no built-in flat screen above it!
“miumiu on July 19th, 2011 at 9:36 pm
@ dahliachi, I love the unit you poster (for the price). I don’t know about the hood, but the interior is much nicer than the comp at least to me.”
That’s my point, 1969 Winona is more attractive so why should it sell for far less than the recent comp?